“Number Talk: Facilitating Computational Fluency”

Aim: Develop students’ mathematical computational fluency

Targeted Age Range: ages 9-11

Objectives:
• Develop variety of strategies to mentally add two digit numbers
• Communicate understanding of how to decompose and compose numbers
• Demonstrate ability to check accuracy of calculations
• Use strategies to remain actively engaged and learning while listening and others are
sharing
• Reinforce targeted habits of mind

Prerequisite mathematical concepts and skills:

• Basic multiplication, addition, subtraction, division, regrouping, base ten,
decomposing/composing numbers, associative/distributive/commutative laws

Developing Habits of mind:

• Persistence
• Listening for/with understanding, empathy
• Thinking flexibly
• Thinking about thinking
• Striving for accuracy
• Posing questions
• Thinking and communicating with clarity, precision
• Creating, imagining, innovating

Lesson overview:
This is a whole class oral activity where the teacher provides students with either a one-digit
number and two-digit number addition equation, or two-digit by two-digit addition equation
and invites students to develop a solution mentally, without using pencil and paper or
calculators. Students then turn take share out their solutions and explain their thinking, while
other students ask clarifying questions or consider alternative strategies, which they then share
aloud. While students are sharing, the teacher scribes the solution on the whiteboard and
facilitates discussion. An example of this type of lesson can be viewed at:
https://youtu.be/DQtgFaVqv7c

Lesson Process:
1) Begin the lesson by saying, “Students we are going to begin our ‘Number Talk’ lesson for
today, but before we begin I want us to review how we are as Math Thinkers during this
lesson. Can you help me out by raising your hands and when called upon to clearly
explain how we conduct ourselves during ‘Number Talk’:
 • What do our bodies need to be doing while we are being Math Thinkers in
our Number Talk lesson today? (Criss Cross Apple Sauce, hands to self,
whisper voices unless called on, eyes up front)
• What hand signals do we use to communicate our thinking process as we
come up with solutions? (signals are outlined in #5 below)
• What does active listening look like? What signals do we use? (See # 8 below
for these)
• In what ways do we support one another when we share our thinking with
the group? (thank yous, positive comments only)
• Why are these Math Thinking behaviours important?

2) Next remind students how you will reinforce and respond to students by saying, ‘Thank
you so much for sharing our Math Thinking behaviours during ‘Number Talk’. When we
behave like Math Thinkers, we really get our Math brains working well! As you know
during Number Talk I will call upon you one at a time by name to share your thinking or
add thoughts and other solutions. Or I might ask generally if anyone has a different
solution. If I ask this question, you simply need to raise your hand silently and I will
choose someone by name to share. I will also let you know when we are on the right
track by providing some reinforcing comments. For example, after Heika has shared her
solution, I might say, “Well done, Heika, that was a very complicated and accurate
solution!”

3) Teacher provides the equation and invites students to develop solutions. For example:
64+2.
4) Students begin considering possible solutions, using strategies learned previously.
5) Teacher provides students with think time and asks for hand signals from students to
communicate where they are in their cognition process. Signals include:
• Sideways thumbs: I have a strategy
• Thumbs up: I have a solution
• Thumbs up with one or more fingers extended: I have a second, third or more
strategy.
6) Teacher invites one student to share solution. She prefaces this by reminding students
that “we all have a strategy in our minds. We are learning that some people may have
different strategies than our own. That is okay. In fact, it is an amazing thing about
thinking. That each of us can come up with a solution to a problem, but do so by
different methods. Math Thinkers value different learning about different ways to solve
problems. So, we need to be accepting and curious about strategies people share that
are different than our own”. The then scribes the solution on the board as the child
explains her strategy.
7) Teacher models acceptance of the strategy, but then asks explicit questions to stretch
students’ cognitive processing, such as:
• Can you tell me why your brain made the decision to reorganize the numbers in
order to do the calculations (64+2 to make 60+6)?
 • What did you know already (prior knowledge) that allowed you to make that
decision?
• Is there a more direct way to do that calculation?
8) Students are encouraged to be active listeners and learners by using hand signals to
show their level of cognitive activity. For example, students can show that they used the
same strategy by showing a wiggling ‘hang ten’ signal. Or, if students have another
strategy they can show their ‘thumbs up + two finger’ signal.
9) Students are asked to quietly turn to a partner and share their alternate strategy with
one another. Then they are asked to make one comment about the partner’ strategy
that they found different that their own.
10) Teacher then thanks the first student and draws on subsequent students to share their
alternative strategies, and explicitly focuses on inviting students to draw comparisons
between the strategies shared. For example, the teacher could say:
• How does your alternate strategy compare with the first? How is it the same?
How is it different?
• Does your brain find this strategy to be a more direct pathway to the solution?
Explain that for us. How do you know?
11) Teacher closes the lesson by having students respond to two questions in their math
journals. One prompt could be: “While Preet was sharing her solution, how did you keep
your thinking brain active? What did it feel like, what were you thinking about?”. Then
she will ask them, “When Heika shared her strategy, what was a strategy you had
developed based partly on her strategy?” Once they have finished their journals,
students are invited to share one new thing they learned today and how it was new
learning. They are given the prompt, “I used to think that…but now I think…”.

Assessment:
• Observational data: gathered as students are thinking, sharing, responding
• Journal writing: reviewed as students share out their writing aloud, as well as when they
provide samples in relation to ‘thinking rubric’.

Behaviour Management strategies:

• Review our habits of mind goals prior to start of lesson, which includes managing our
restlessness and impulsivity. Discuss how we do that
• Provide visual contact, proximity and affirmative descriptive feedback such as, It is so
helpful to our thinking process that we are all sitting calmly and have our hands in our
laps”
• Provide reinforcers such as, ‘Thank you, Jules, for sharing your first strategy and to those
for showing us with their hand signal that they have a second strategy”
• Pacing: keep the lesson moving without interrupting instruction/sharing to engage with
negative behaviours

Cognitive Management strategies:

 • Prior to lesson and during, review, remind/discuss what active engagement/thinking
looks like, feels like.

Number Talk Lesson Plan Analysis:

Behavourism, Neuroscience, Developmental Theory

This lesson analysis shows how the application of three learning theories can be used to
improve a Number Talk lesson plan. The analysis relies on perspectives from three learning
theories: Behavourism, Neuroscience, Developmental theory.

A Behaviourist Perspective:
Behaviourism “emphasize changes in behavior that result from stimulus-response associations
made by the learner. An individual selects one response instead of another because of prior
conditioning and psychological drives existing at the moment of the action” (Standridge, 2002).
Behaviourism theory argues that all behaviour is learned and this learning is directly related to
the effectiveness of the reward. To obtain a desired behaviour the learner must be rewarded.
BF Skinner believed positive reinforcement was much more effective for shaping behavior
(McLeod, 2007).

Masterful teachers establish and maintaining behavioural norms that make for a well-managed
classroom, within which powerful learning can occur. The Number Talk lesson relies on
routinized student-student/student-teacher interaction strategies to ensure the smooth
unfolding of the lesson that maintains focus on student learning. The original plan did not
provide specific review of routines, nor did it articulate clearly how the teacher would reinforce
student behavior. To improve the lesson, an introduction section is added that addresses these
and makes the behavioural elements more explicit. Now at the start of the lesson the teacher
invites the students to explain the following:
1. What do our bodies need to be doing while we are being Math Thinkers in our Number
Talk lesson today? (Criss Cross Apple Sauce, hands to self, whisper voices unless called
on, eyes up front)
2. What hand signals do we use to communicate our thinking process as we come up with
solutions? (signals are outlined in #5 in lesson plan)
3. What does active listening look like? What signals do we use? (See # 8 in lesson plan for
these)
4. In what ways do we support one another when we share our thinking with the group?
(thank yous, positive comments only)
5. Why are these Math Thinking behaviours important?
The revised lesson also outlines how the teacher will respond to students to positively reinforce
the Math Thinking behaviours, as well as to reward students for being on track with their
thinking and problem-solving solutions.

Effective teachers establish behaviourist based management processes that establish purpose,
clear routines and set norms for how successful learners work together during the lesson, and
how these will be reinforced positively and consistently. Once they are established and
maintained, they can operate in service to the instructional focus on powerful Math learning,
not as ends in themselves. The addition of these elements to the Number Talk lesson is an
important improvement to the plan.

A Neuroscience Perspective:
Neuroscience presents educators with findings that impact instruction and learning. The aim of
the Number Talk lesson is to develop students’ mathematical computational fluency. When
considered from a Neuroscience perspective, the Number Talk lesson has Neuroscience
elements that could be strengthened.

Zamarian et al (2009) describe brain patterning for math experts as well as those who have
engaged in Math practice. For those who are gaining some mastery through intentional
practice, “monitoring and working memory demands decrease, which is reflected in a decrease
in activation within the frontal brain areas” (p. 918). There is less in the moment calculation
going on in the working memory and more basic retrieval functions happening from the AG or
long-term memory. Short term, intense practice seems to result in “structural modifications in
the brain areas involved in numeric processing” (p. 918).

Considering this research, the Number Talk lesson is revised at steps 7-11 to more explicitly
activate student cognitive processes and cerebral areas. In the original lesson plan the teacher
plans to ask neutral questions, such as “tell me why you reorganized the numbers?” This
question is an optional one. In the revised lesson plan the teacher explicitly pauses and asks
targeted questions to intentionally activate deeper cognition:
• Can you tell me why your brain made the decision to reorganize the numbers in order
to do the calculations?
• What prior knowledge made you make that decision?
• Is there a more direct way to do that calculation?
Similarly, in step 10 where students are asked to share alternate strategies, the revised lesson
emphasizes the strategy comparison phase; that is:
• How does your alternate strategy compare with the first? How is it the same? How is it
different?
• Does your brain find this strategy to be a more direct pathway to the solution? Explain
that for us. How do you know?
Finally, in step 11 the conclusion to the lesson has a revised journal activity. The teacher will
deliberately ask the metacognitive question: “While X was sharing a solution, how did you keep
your thinking brain active? What did it feel like, what were you thinking about?” The teacher
will also ask: “What was a strategy you had developed based partly on Heika’s strategy?”

The revisions to the Number Talk lesson plan based on a Neuroscience perspective more
explicitly trigger and promote activation of cerebral networks involved in arithmetic processing,
as well as those that engage other cognitive processes and cerebral areas that are shown to
foster deeper math learning.

A Developmental Perspective:
The Neuroscience research perspective does not take into account the interactive, social
aspects of learning that educational research promotes as valuable to enhance student
learning. Therefore, it is helpful to consider revisions to the Number Talk lesson through a
Developmental lens. Glasersfeld (2008) articulates that learners actively create individualized
knowing of things and the world through a cognitively reflective experiential process. Both
Piagetian and Vygotskian developmental theories are alive with this notion.

Piaget (1937) observed that, “intelligence organizes the world by organizing itself” (p. 400). In
other words, the solution to a problem reflects the thinker’s current operational knowledge
when reflecting upon and applied to that new situation. Piaget asserts that this changes as
learners move from one developmental stage to another. He argues that learning should be
“students’ successful organization of his or her own experiences” (p. 39). From this perspective,
the Number Talk lesson plan is revised to target a particular age range: approximately 9-11
years old. Students at this age fall into the Piagetian Concrete Operational stage; that is, logical
thinking is developing, as is the ability to consider other ways of seeing a situation or problem.
This, however, may be emerging or challenging for some students. Consequently, the lesson is
revised at step 6 to include prefatory remarks/discussion by the teacher that explicitly
acknowledges the value and aim of considering other solutions and strategies that are different
from our own.

Like Piaget, Vygotsky believes that instruction needs to be targeted at levels that are accessible
to learners. This he referred to as the ‘Zone of Proximal Development’ (ZPD). The Number Talk
lesson is pitched at a mathematical level that is accessible to 9-11 year olds. Vygotsky also
believes that learning is experiential and emphasizes the importance of internal reflection
within an individual’s cultural history/social milieu that creates a transformative learning
process. Learning and acquired knowledge requires the active engagement of the mind
(Glassman, 1994). The original Number Talk lesson is teacher directed. The revised lesson offers
a partner discussion at step 10. Here students exchange alternative strategies and discuss their
differences at achieving the solution. Step 11 also is revised to provide a conversation between
peers about one thing they learned in the lesson and why it was new learning. They are given
the prompt, “I used to think that…but now I think…”.

Piaget’s theories underscore the importance of understanding the ages/stages of children’s

cognitive development in order to target learning objectives, and activities that optimally
promote learning. Vygotsky’s theory of learning as a social/cultural enterprise encourages
teachers to include components of social interaction within lessons.

Conclusion:
The analysis and revision of this Number Talk lesson based on Behavourism, Neuroscience, and
Developmental learning theories improved the lesson plan. Drawing on these theories as a
planning framework brought focus to the plan. Strategies were added that explicitly
emphasized important aspects of each theory that promote optimal student learning.
Behaviourist strategies are vital to help students remain engaged and motivated while learning.
The revised lesson articulates clear, reasonable behavior expectations and reinforces them
predictably and consistently with positive feedback and rewards. Neuroscience suggests that
conceptual and calculative activities trigger, develop the kinds of cognitive networks associated
with expert math thinkers’ skills and habits of mind. The revised lesson incorporates explicit
metacognitive thinking questions during the mental math activities that activate these
networks and develop these skills and habits of mind. Developmental theorist, Piaget,
identifies stages of cognitive development that our revised lesson plan attends to by targeting a
particular age group: 9-11 years. Vygotsky identifies the active, reflective mind as an agent for
creating individualized knowledge. The revised lesson builds in moments for individual
reflection, partner discussion, as well as whole group sharing. The blending of these three
perspectives provides a balanced methodological approach that informs and enriches this
Number Talk lesson plan.

Citations:
DeSouza, J., Ovaysikia, S., & Pynn, L. (2012). Correlating behavioral responses to MRI signals
from human prefrontal cortex: Examining cognitive processes using task analysis. Journal Of
Visualized Experiments, (64), 1. doi:10.3791/3237

Glassman, M. (1994). All things being equal: the two roads of Piaget and
Vygotsky. Developmental Review, 14, 186-214.

Kühn, S. M., Müller, B. N., van Baaren, R. B., Brass, M., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2014). The importance
of the default mode network in creativity—A structural MRI study. The Journal of Creative
Behavior, 48(2), 152-163. doi:10.1002/jocb.45

Kompa, J. S. (2015). Strengths and Limitations of Behaviorism for Human Learning. Applied
Psychology and Education. Retrieved from: https://joanakompa.com/2015/05/02/strengths-
and-limitations-of-behaviorism-for-learning/.

McLeod, S.A. (2007). Behaviorist Approach. Retrieved from

https://www.simplypsychology.org/behaviorism.html, p. 9-21.

Piaget, J. (1937). La Construction du Reel Chez l’enfant. Neuchatel : Delachaux et Niestle.

Von Glasersfeld, E. (2008). Learning as a Constructive Activity. AntiMatters, 2(3), 33-49.

Zamarian, L., Ischebeck, A., & Delazer, M. (2009). Neuroscience of learning arithmetic: Evidence
from brain imaging studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 909-925.